Club for Growth rips Newt for criticizing Romney’s investment income

posted at 4:56 pm on January 25, 2012 by Allahpundit

Ed touched on Gingrich’s comments earlier (lefty Greg Sargent gleefully titled his post on the subject, “Capitalism on trial”), but now that big conservative outlets like CFG are pushing back, I figured they deserved a second post. Again, here’s what the putative GOP nominee had to say about Romnney’s outrageous scheme of making big money off of smart investments:

When asked about Romney’s position on immigration, Gingrich said that deporting all undocumented immigrants is unrealistic.

“You have to live in a world of Swiss bank accounts and Cayman Island accounts and making $20 million for no work, to have some fantasy this far from reality,” Gingrich said.

Over to you, Club for Growth:

“Newt Gingrich says he’s a student of history, but he must have gone to the same school as Barack Obama if he is reaching the same wrong conclusion about economic freedom, “said Club for Growth President Chris Chocola. “Mitt Romney made his money from putting capital to work to create jobs and economic growth. We should encourage, not criticize, such behavior. Newt Gingrich’s comment that Mitt Romney made money from ‘no work’ is ridiculous and continues his poisonous attack on economic freedom.”

Says Sargent, “Romney is half right when he says his critics are putting capitalism on trial. This election is putting his brand of capitalism on trial.” Does Newt agree? If so, what does he think is the difference between Romney’s “brand of capitalism” and the real thing given that no one’s accused Mitt of having dodged any taxes with his Swiss and Cayman accounts? Note that there’s nothing about Bain in what Gingrich said this morning so this isn’t a critique per se of corporate takeovers. His objection seems to be more basic, that Romney’s so far out of touch with America’s problems by dint of being rich — or rather, idly rich — that his policy proposals are bound to come out of left field. I’m curious to know what he thinks Romney should do to remedy that. Should he start a charity and manage it just so that he has something to do all day and some reason to interact with people? If that’s too white-collar, how about him taking a nine-to-five job manning the counter at Starbucks? Evidently none of Romney’s decades of work in finance and as governor are sufficient to pull him out of the super-rich “fantasy”-land he currently inhabits, so he needs to take dramatic action to ground himself in real-America’s concerns. Thank goodness there’s a guy with a $500,000 line of credit at Tiffany’s around to give him advice.

Philip Klein asks a question that’ll send a chill down your spine: Is Newt Gingrich a “Saul Alinsky Republican”?

In his seminal 1971 work, “Rules for Radicals,” left-wing community organizer Alinsky laid out his method for instigating change. Many of the tactics he spoke about — such as exploiting resentment and pitting oneself against the establishment — have become a central part of Gingrich’s strategy for securing the Republican presidential nomination…

Gingrich has continued his class warfare strategy in Florida, referring to Romney on Wednesday as somebody who was “liv(ing) in a world of Swiss bank accounts and Cayman Island accounts and making $20 million for no work. …”

It may be odd for somebody claiming to be a conservative to employ the tactics of the left, but Alinsky wrote an entire chapter on the arbitrary ethics of when the ends justify the means, noting that, “generally success or failure is a mighty determinant of ethics.”

Follow the link for more examples of Newt’s Alinskyite strategy, especially vis-a-vis debate moderators and the media. In fairness to Gingrich, it does reflect some sort of genius on his part that he could use tactics championed by one of conservatives’ foremost boogeymen to help turn himself into the conservative standard-bearer in the race. In lieu of video of Newt discussing Romney’s finances, here’s millionaire liberal Jon Stewart goofing on millionaire moderate Mitt Romney for making too darned much money for what he does. Exit quotation: “In the time it took Jon Stewart to say ‘That’s almost $57,000 a day’, the gov’t spent $180,000 (3.3 seconds).”


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

You made the blustery assertion. You got called on it. Now it’s your responsibility to put up or shut up…not for others to go chase down some evidence to “prove” a negative to you. But here’s a start: Toomey & Rubio.

fitzfong on January 25, 2012 at 5:31 PM

Toomey’s the former PRESIDENT of CFG. Some liberal there!!

rockmom on January 25, 2012 at 5:33 PM

FlaMurph on January 25, 2012 at 5:24 PM

Please, please, please do not try to sell me on that national campaign for the middle. It has been tried and tried again and it fails consistently. The very definition of insanity.

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 5:33 PM

What would you call to labeling capital gains that results of one’s investing and risking his own money to “making money sitting on his ass”? That’s pretty much communist ling and playing with resentment.

joana on January 25, 2012 at 5:32 PM

I missed Glenn’s show this week. Is that the new talking point hew’s spewing?

PS: Did you know gold can be a great investment? Call Glenn now at 1-800-SUCKER and he will tell you all about it.

angryed on January 25, 2012 at 5:33 PM

I asked this question in an earlier thread. I’m curious to see if you get a more satisfactory response than I did.

Kataklysmic on January 25, 2012 at 5:06 PM

.
You know what Mittens needs to do. And it would shut up all of the -eat the rich people in the proper way. What he needs to do is to do what Andrew Carnegie or Bill Gates did/do with their wealth and simply say he plans to give away most of his fortune to humanitarian causes. Go ahead- let oblamer suck on that ! Bill Gates has done great things with his wealth. THATS what WEALTH IS FOR !! It doesn’t mean your a bad person if your rich. Doesn’t mean your a good person because you are poor. Good or bad – MONEY doesn’t decide that. But to be rich AND be a good steward- thats a winner!!!!!!! which Mittens does give away some of his money already- Who could argue against that? Not even Newt !!!

FlaMurph on January 25, 2012 at 5:34 PM

Joana:

Romney hasn’t worked for about 15 years. I mean real work, not campaigning or as goevernor of MA. Which means his $21M income last year was 100% passive income. In other words, sitting on his ass and making $21M.

angryed on January 25, 2012 at 5:29 PM

Well, if political work isn’t work, Gingrich hasn’t worked since, what, the lat 70s?

I understand that you’re horrified with the fact that capitalism works that way – there’s money to be made of investing your money wisely – and that you bought the communist notion that capitalists/investors just sit on their ass. I don’t have any patience to discuss that sort of far-left concepts, so just let agree to disagree.

joana on January 25, 2012 at 5:34 PM

No, it was Willard, Lord Romney who went to the same school as Barack Obama– Harvard Law School.

Emperor Norton on January 25, 2012 at 5:27 PM

Is that the same Harvard law School that educated John Roberts and Antonin Scalia?

Good law school, it looks like. As opposed to that clown college in New Orleans, known as Too Late University.

JohnGalt23 on January 25, 2012 at 5:34 PM

No, we’ve known the Club for Growth is the enemy of conservatism for a long, long time, Cici. They’re not RINOs, they’re freaking Democrats.

Al-Ozarka on January 25, 2012 at 5:13 PM

Wow…. speechless…..

One wonders how far things can go before introspection happens and people start to think “Maybe’s it’s not everyone else. Maybe I’m actually wrong about this.”

alchemist19 on January 25, 2012 at 5:34 PM

I hear “eleventh commandment” being bandied about quite a bit. Those who use it never seem to grasp its proper context. And it’s being broken here.

KingGold on July 27, 2011 at 1:24 PM

Well, when you’ve already gone around breaking all the actual commandments, breaking the ones Reagan made isn’t such a big deal.

Seriously, we’re going to nominate Newt as the standard bearer of our party?

::facepalm::

Swerve22 on January 25, 2012 at 5:34 PM

And sorry, it’s pretty obvious Coleman wouldn’t just be making this up out of whole cloth. He blew the lid off and now Romney shills like you are running damage control.

Doomberg on January 25, 2012 at 5:30 PM

Not even close to being accurate. Coleman was speaking for himself and Romney wasn’t mentioned. Romney has pledged to issue waivers to the states on day one. After that, it’s not completely up to him, unless they’ve made crucial changes to the Constitution. Coleman was talking about the process, not what Romney wants to do. President Romney will sign whatever repeal legislation a GOP-controlled Congress sends his way. We can do this dance over and over again if you want.

cicerone on January 25, 2012 at 5:35 PM

PS: Did you know gold can be a great investment? Call Glenn now at 1-800-SUCKER and he will tell you all about it.

angryed on January 25, 2012 at 5:33 PM

Hey, don’t go bashing gold now. I invested a little in 2009 and profited fairly handsomely from it. :)

Doomberg on January 25, 2012 at 5:35 PM

Doomberg on January 25, 2012 at 5:30 PM

Nice deflection, but I see no reference to 1) increased taxes, 2) a VAT, and 3) anything said by Mitt Romney himself.

Buy a clue, friend.

KingGold on January 25, 2012 at 5:36 PM

BedBug on January 25, 2012 at 5:18 PM

Are you going to answer my question from the other thread on Explaining the differences between the Socialism in Europe and the Downgrade Administration’s version of Socialism?

And explain how El Presidente Downgrade plan’s to avoid the pitfall of the ultimate failure of Socialism?

Chip on January 25, 2012 at 5:36 PM

Romney hasn’t worked for about 15 years. I mean real work, not campaigning or as goevernor of MA. Which means his $21M income last year was 100% passive income. In other words, sitting on his ass and making $21M.

angryed on January 25, 2012 at 5:29 PM

Yep. But he EARNED every penny of it. I’ll bet he worked more hours in the time he was at Bain than you have in your life.

rockmom on January 25, 2012 at 5:36 PM

I wonder how soon Neutron newt will suggest a Cloward/Piven stategery?

csdeven on January 25, 2012 at 5:36 PM

From Wikipedia:

During the 2008 Republican presidential primaries, the Club was critical of Mike Huckabee, using funds from backers of Mitt Romney to attack him as the “tax-increasing liberal governor of Arkansas”.m Wikipedia about Club for Growth -

Amjean on January 25, 2012 at 5:36 PM

It is up to Newt to prop his primary opponent up? What kind of twisted world do you live in?

astonerii on January 25, 2012 at 5:30 PM

Apparantly the same one AP does. In my world there is a happy medium between propping up one’s opponent and resorting to Marxist talking points in order to defeat him.

Kataklysmic on January 25, 2012 at 5:37 PM

Well, if political work isn’t work, Gingrich hasn’t worked since, what, the lat 70s?

joana on January 25, 2012 at 5:34 PM

Newt’s “political work” makes him a “working man”, just like a prostitute’s work makes her a “working girl”.

JohnGalt23 on January 25, 2012 at 5:37 PM

Thank goodness there’s a guy with a $500,000 line of credit at Tiffany’s around to give him advice

ouch, Allah, that hurt :-)

jimver on January 25, 2012 at 5:37 PM

I’ve come to believe that all the candidates are too damaged to challange Obama. This is all so destructive and quite depressing. I haven’t really settled on any candidate and at one time or another I think I supported each one of them, depending on who I thought could actually win the general. Now I don’t think we can win with any of them. I’m hoping for a brokered convension.

steel guy on January 25, 2012 at 5:38 PM

When the Fed articially depresses interest rate by fiat, as they have for 5 years, that’s not economic freedom, and that’s not capitalism. It’s a contrived and phony economic world, supervised by the central planners at the Federal Reserve–which should be called the Politburo of Money.

Emperor Norton on January 25, 2012 at 5:38 PM

Well, when you’ve already gone around breaking all the actual commandments, breaking the ones Reagan made isn’t such a big deal.

Swerve22 on January 25, 2012 at 5:34 PM

The Sixth and Ninth Commandments are just agenda items of the liberal media and the GOP Establishment.

Vote for Newt.

KingGold on January 25, 2012 at 5:39 PM

Romney owned shares in a bond fund which included Fannie and Freddie bonmds. In a blind trust. As part of a diversified investment portfolio. Which he had no role in selecting. But yeah, that’s exactly the same as Newt actually shilling for Freddie Mac and advising its chief lobbyist who resigned in disgrace after Freddie paid a record fine for campaign finance violations.

rockmom on January 25, 2012 at 5:27 PM


Romney pummels, profits from Fannie, Freddie

And unlike most of Romney’s financial holdings, which are held in a blind trust that is overseen by a trustee and not known to Romney, this particular investment was among those that would have been known to Romney.

The investment was also not on Romney’s 2007 financial disclosure form. A Romney aide said the investments were made in the latter half of 2007, after he had filed the earlier disclosure form. That was around the time that the scale of the housing crisis was coming into focus.

The campaign declined to comment on the record. The Romney aide said the investment was made by Romney’s charitable trust.

tetriskid on January 25, 2012 at 5:39 PM

Newt is going for that all important left-wing demo/ows vote. In a Republican primary. He got the cheetah and amnesiac vote all locked up, so who is to say it’s a bad strategy ?

runner on January 25, 2012 at 5:40 PM

Romney hasn’t worked for about 15 years. I mean real work, not campaigning or as goevernor of MA. Which means his $21M income last year was 100% passive income. In other words, sitting on his ass and making $21M.

angryed on January 25, 2012 at 5:29 PM

By this logic, every senior voter who’s sitting on their ass and collecting a retirement check for their years of service (whatever their profession) is a g*ddamn freeloader.

We should put out a campaign add accusing them as such!

Vyce on January 25, 2012 at 5:40 PM

I missed Glenn’s show this week. Is that the new talking point hew’s spewing?

PS: Did you know gold can be a great investment? Call Glenn now at 1-800-SUCKER and he will tell you all about it.

angryed on January 25, 2012 at 5:33 PM

I haven’t watched a Glenn Beck show in years.

Your attempt to shift goal posts by using strawmans, trying to make this about Beck (?), is quite amusing.

You believe that one who makes smart capital investments and profits from it is “not working” and “making money sitting on his ass”. You’re not alone in that, it’s a fairly common opinion amongst far-left radicals. As I’ve said, there’s nothing more to discuss.

joana on January 25, 2012 at 5:40 PM

One wonders how far things can go before introspection happens and people start to think “Maybe’s it’s not everyone else. Maybe I’m actually wrong about this.”

alchemist19 on January 25, 2012 at 5:34 PM

You’ll never go hungry overestimating the capacity for self-delusion of some on the Right. These are the same people who think that Newt has “grown up” since he was a fifty-five year-old philanderer.

JohnGalt23 on January 25, 2012 at 5:41 PM

Is it okay to bash Newt for Freddie while investing and profiting from them? All of this is most confusing.

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 5:01 PM

It’s time for you to take another break. You clearly have no clue how investments work.

csdeven on January 25, 2012 at 5:41 PM

By this logic, every senior voter who’s sitting on their ass and collecting a retirement check for their years of service (whatever their profession) is a g*ddamn freeloader.

We should put out a campaign add accusing them as such!

Vyce on January 25, 2012 at 5:40 PM

You just tried logic on an angryed post. This is not going to end well.

alchemist19 on January 25, 2012 at 5:43 PM

So I guess keeping wealth in Swiss bank accounts and in the Cayman Islands is all part of Captialism. I like the part where the all American Romney has large foreign investments. That is good for America.

Zelsdorf Ragshaft on January 25, 2012 at 5:19 PM

Damn straight it is. And it’s all perfectly legal as long as it’s disclosed on your 1040 and you pay taxes on the interest income/earnings. Many people I know park their money in such venues, not to avoid taxes because you can’t legally do so, but for wealth protection purposes, i.e., to keep a good part of your estate off the radar of greedy trial lawyers and other undesirables.

TXUS on January 25, 2012 at 5:44 PM

right-wing social engineering = bad
newtonomics = doubleplusgood

runner on January 25, 2012 at 5:44 PM

Not even close to being accurate. Coleman was speaking for himself and Romney wasn’t mentioned. Romney has pledged to issue waivers to the states on day one. After that, it’s not completely up to him, unless they’ve made crucial changes to the Constitution. Coleman was talking about the process, not what Romney wants to do. President Romney will sign whatever repeal legislation a GOP-controlled Congress sends his way. We can do this dance over and over again if you want.

cicerone on January 25, 2012 at 5:35 PM

First, you can spin all you want, but no way is Coleman making this up out of thin cloth. Really, if the Gingrich super-PAC director said “Newt is planning to raise taxes” would you guys believe Newt if he said “Hey, that was just my donor! I would never do that!”

I didn’t think so.

On the “mechanical” side of things, as president, Romney can quietly lobby the GOP members from behind the scenes to not repeal Obamacare. Since the GOP is unlikely to get a supermajority, this will be used as an excuse for inaction. If the GOP Congress actually sent repeal legislation to his desk, he would sign it, but the Senate can be used as a firewall to make sure that never happens. In the event we do get a supermajority, a blue state liberal Republican can be used in place of the Democrats.

If Romney is the nominee, we’ll pretty much have to hope the USSC kills the legislation. That’ll be our last shot (by our, I mean Republicans who don’t like Obamacare. I doubt that applies to you).

Doomberg on January 25, 2012 at 5:44 PM

is it just me or are the comments/commenters on HA getting more and more bizarre?

I think we can all agree that the R party is more or less coming apart.

Rs generally have been a poor steward of our country. Part of this is their own venality. Part of it is due to the unrelenting Alinsky level of ridicule and hatred from the press and popular culture.

but I think part of it is that they have become comfortable in the ‘fact’ that this is a center right county. That has lulled them into complacency for the last 20+ years…resulting in Dole, Bush, McCain…who are all centrists that luv to ‘work’ with the left. And so, when their ‘compassionate’ affordable housing scam fails, and brings down the economy, it is too late to mount any arguments about Capitalism

Cloward/Piven 1, Rs 0…I don’t even think the party of stupid gets it yet

r keller on January 25, 2012 at 5:45 PM

The very definition of insanity.

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 5:33 PM

.
Do you think GW Bush was a strong conservative? I sense a bitterness toward the moderate Indies and that only serves to push them away. Don’t confuse what is possible in House/Senate races with what is necessary at the Presidential level.
You think Indies are waiting for a Pro-Abortion, Anti-Gay marriage- faith based, personal responsibilty “renewal” platform for this coming election? The swing voters are reject the controversy- thats why there in the middle. If your goal is to remove Maobama- you NEED these Indie voters. Rs have to walk the moderate tight-rope very carefully. Its not 1980 anymore.

FlaMurph on January 25, 2012 at 5:45 PM

Should have said “off the radar or reach of greedy trial lawyers…

Time for a cocktail.

TXUS on January 25, 2012 at 5:46 PM

Romney hasn’t worked for about 15 years. I mean real work, not campaigning or as goevernor of MA. Which means his $21M income last year was 100% passive income. In other words, sitting on his ass and making $21M.

angryed on January 25, 2012 at 5:29 PM

Posting from your OWS campsite?

JPeterman on January 25, 2012 at 5:46 PM

Club for Growth- Bunch of Rino’s. Washington Examiner- bunch of Rino’s. Those who support Newt Swingrich have bought into the we’re all Socialists now narrative. BTW, spending lots of money on whores does ‘t make you a capitalist. Stalin spent even more the Newt on his hoes.

Gingrich: The Saul Alinsky Republican

Rockshine on January 25, 2012 at 5:47 PM

is it just me or are the comments/commenters on HA getting more and more bizarre?

r keller on January 25, 2012 at 5:45 PM

Yep. The last OR let in a lot of strange posters and trolls. I was taking a break when the floodgates opened and HA can be a hot steamin’ mess these days.

OmahaConservative on January 25, 2012 at 5:48 PM

JohnGalt23 on January 25, 2012 at 5:31 PM

There is only one Mike Huckabee, a true conservative, and I resent your implication that he is anything but. He would be President today if establishment darling and RINO-Superior John McCain and his two lapdogs Romney and Thompson hadn’t conspired to thwart the will of the base and deny him the nomination in 2008. And Huckabee could be winning the primary today if that awful Roger Ailes hadn’t threatened him when he made noises about running before the primary started. Now the mantle has fallen upon Newt, and he will crush these losers.

Mr. Arkadin on January 25, 2012 at 5:48 PM

Nice deflection, but I see no reference to 1) increased taxes, 2) a VAT, and 3) anything said by Mitt Romney himself.

Buy a clue, friend.

KingGold on January 25, 2012 at 5:36 PM

From: http://www.redstate.com/erick/2012/01/25/romney-advisor-no-obamacare-repeal/

As Ben Domenech notes in his Transom, Mitt Romney’s advisors have now advised him to support “a $2 gas tax, a VAT, and open Taliban talks.” Add to that list not repealing Obamacare. Norm Coleman, an advisor to Romney, went on record saying

Check the links on the page the next time. It’s not a deflection.

Doomberg on January 25, 2012 at 5:48 PM

On the “mechanical” side of things, as president, Romney can quietly lobby the GOP members from behind the scenes to not repeal Obamacare. Since the GOP is unlikely to get a supermajority, this will be used as an excuse for inaction. If the GOP Congress actually sent repeal legislation to his desk, he would sign it, but the Senate can be used as a firewall to make sure that never happens. In the event we do get a supermajority, a blue state liberal Republican can be used in place of the Democrats.

No wonder the supermarket was out of tinfoil…

Swerve22 on January 25, 2012 at 5:48 PM

Newt is going for that all important left-wing demo/ows vote. In a Republican primary. He got the cheetah and amnesiac vote all locked up, so who is to say it’s a bad strategy ?

runner on January 25, 2012 at 5:40 PM

Well said!!!

Gunlock Bill on January 25, 2012 at 5:49 PM

Brokered convention, our only hope.

steel guy on January 25, 2012 at 5:50 PM

NO, Freddie and Fannie are evil and the cause of the collapse of the national economy and Newt lobbied consulted with them and told them to give loans to people who couldn’t afford them! I demand that any and all of my funds be divested from the source of all of our problems.

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 5:19 PM

Why are you sarcastic? You obviously think that nobody should invest in Fanny and Freddie, or you wouldn’t condemn Romney for doing it. The problem is that you can’t always control in what you invest.

There are worlds between investing in a mutual fund and having a contract with the head of Freddie’s lobbying department.

Gelsomina on January 25, 2012 at 5:50 PM

FlaMurph on January 25, 2012 at 5:45 PM

I think was smart enough to portray himself as one but alas he wasn’t but I respect him and appreciate how he lead the country after 9/11 and how he has elevated the office by his actions. I could have lived without No Child Left Behind and I wish that Medicare Part D would have been paid for.

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 5:51 PM

No wonder the supermarket was out of tinfoil…

Swerve22 on January 25, 2012 at 5:48 PM

The GOP used the excuse “The Democrats have the White House!” when they passed most of Obama’s spending increases last year. It’s hardly “tinfoil hat” territory that they’ll use the Democrat minority in the Senate as the new excuse not to cut spending.

Doomberg on January 25, 2012 at 5:52 PM

Check the links on the page the next time. It’s not a deflection.

Doomberg on January 25, 2012 at 5:48 PM

I’m going to put this in bold this time, so I’m sure you read it.

Show me something Mitt Romney said about raising taxes or a VAT.

Unless you do, you’re talking out of your backside, because I could rattle off about a zillion terrible, terrible policies advocated or once advocated by members of Team Newt.

KingGold on January 25, 2012 at 5:52 PM

Obama brings a Howitzer. Newt will bring out an Abrams tank.

angryed on January 25, 2012 at 5:09 PM

The 155 Howitzer has a range of 18 miles. The Abrams around 3 miles.

Ed, you’re losing it dude. Why don’t you take a break for a day or so, then come back and we all can start over.

csdeven on January 25, 2012 at 5:52 PM

Mitt’s position on VAT is a fair question…I just hope Newt doesn’t Karate chop the moderator tomorrow before he gets to ask it…

runner on January 25, 2012 at 5:52 PM

There is only one Mike Huckabee, a true conservative, and I resent your implication that he is anything but.

Mr. Arkadin on January 25, 2012 at 5:48 PM

True conservative.

/snicker

JohnGalt23 on January 25, 2012 at 5:53 PM

Let me see if I have Angryed’s ‘logic’ down correctly:

Romney is teh evil because he performs “no work” (while spending the past 3 years working to elect Republicans, but I digress) and has a blind trust which invests in evil bond funds which sell things like U.S. Treasuries.

Newt is teh hero because “did work” which included preying on small business owners with scams which gave out phony “Entrepreneurship of the Year” awards in exchange for a sweet $5000 fee. Among the winners? A strip club and a pornographer.

Newt Newt Newt Newt Newt!!

Buy Danish on January 25, 2012 at 5:53 PM

Romney hasn’t worked for about 15 years. I mean real work, not campaigning or as goevernor of MA. Which means his $21M income last year was 100% passive income. In other words, sitting on his ass and making $21M.

angryed on January 25, 2012 at 5:29 PM

I heard the OWS is planning a big come back in spring, which gives you the opportunity to get off yours and become active and involved again…can’t guarantee 21 millions, but I heard there’s free food and all…

jimver on January 25, 2012 at 5:53 PM

There is only one Mike Huckabee, a true conservative, and I resent your implication that he is anything but. He would be President today if establishment darling and RINO-Superior John McCain and his two lapdogs Romney and Thompson hadn’t conspired to thwart the will of the base and deny him the nomination in 2008. And Huckabee could be winning the primary today if that awful Roger Ailes hadn’t threatened him when he made noises about running before the primary started. Now the mantle has fallen upon Newt, and he will crush these losers.

Mr. Arkadin on January 25, 2012 at 5:48 PM

Please remember to include the sarc tag next time.

alchemist19 on January 25, 2012 at 5:54 PM

Gelsomina on January 25, 2012 at 5:50 PM

No, I think both candidates need to realize that sauce for the goose, is sauce for the gander. As a matter of fact, as much as I despise Gov. Romney’s pandering to the middle, I think Newt is doing the same thing by promoting class warfare. For me the only things Newt has going for him is at least a history of conservatism and the guts to take on Obama. And it’s not much of an advantage, but it is one.

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 5:55 PM

The 155 Howitzer has a range of 18 miles. The Abrams around 3 miles.

Ed, you’re losing it dude. Why don’t you take a break for a day or so, then come back and we all can start over.

csdeven on January 25, 2012 at 5:52 PM

I think he meant by that that the Abrams are louder :-)

jimver on January 25, 2012 at 5:55 PM

No, it was Willard, Lord Romney who went to the same school as Barack Obama– Harvard Law School.

Emperor Norton on January 25, 2012 at 5:27 PM

.
Hahvard law AND MBA in their business school. Hey maybe HE could be the “SMARTEST” President evah !!!!!!!!
.
But granted not the best politician. But aren’t most career politicians scumbags?? Seriously. And that is not a shot at Newton. BUT politicians are generally in it for what they can get out of it for THEMSELVES. Wasn’t this a meme in 2008 ? What happened? Did we not learn from Pelosi, Shumer, Kennedy, Dodd and all of the lifers-term limits- 3-5 terms and thats it.

FlaMurph on January 25, 2012 at 5:56 PM

As for the Cayman Islands, Newt needs to back off and come up with another way to illustrate that Romney is out of touch with people.

INC on January 25, 2012 at 5:15 PM

It used to be that all you had to do was shut up and let Romney speak. But since 2008 he has improved immensely. He has shown marked improvement over the last several months.

csdeven on January 25, 2012 at 5:57 PM

There is only one Mike Huckabee, a true conservative, and I resent your implication that he is anything but. He would be President today if establishment darling and RINO-Superior John McCain and his two lapdogs Romney and Thompson hadn’t conspired to thwart the will of the base and deny him the nomination in 2008. And Huckabee could be winning the primary today if that awful Roger Ailes hadn’t threatened him when he made noises about running before the primary started. Now the mantle has fallen upon Newt, and he will crush these losers.

Mr. Arkadin on January 25, 2012 at 5:48 PM

That’s damn good parody.

I don’t think I could have written it any snarkier myself.

Mike Huckabee, a “true conservative.” Nyuk, nyuk, nyuk!

KingGold on January 25, 2012 at 5:57 PM

On the “mechanical” side of things, as president, Romney can quietly lobby the GOP members from behind the scenes to not repeal Obamacare.

That’s a nifty conspiracy theory you’ve got there. Now, tell me more about those aliens the government is keeping secret in Area 51. And then I’m still a little confused over the whole faked moon landing thing.

Since the GOP is unlikely to get a supermajority, this will be used as an excuse for inaction. If the GOP Congress actually sent repeal legislation to his desk, he would sign it, but the Senate can be used as a firewall to make sure that never happens. In the event we do get a supermajority, a blue state liberal Republican can be used in place of the Democrats.

Doomberg on January 25, 2012 at 5:44 PM

And I’m also curious about Illuminati. Maybe he’s one of those Illuminati guys…

cicerone on January 25, 2012 at 5:57 PM

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 5:55 PM

.
Cindy- YOU CANNOT WIN without the middle. The math is not there. What do you not get about this??

FlaMurph on January 25, 2012 at 5:57 PM

I’m going to put this in bold this time, so I’m sure you read it.

Show me something Mitt Romney said about raising taxes or a VAT.

Unless you do, you’re talking out of your backside, because I could rattle off about a zillion terrible, terrible policies advocated or once advocated by members of Team Newt.

KingGold on January 25, 2012 at 5:52 PM

You can feel free to slam Newt’s advisers all you like; in fact, I’m surprised they haven’t already been attacked. I’ll repeat what I said to cicerone earlier and leave it at that:

“First, you can spin all you want, but no way is Coleman making this up out of thin cloth. Really, if the Gingrich super-PAC director said “Newt is planning to raise everyone’s taxes” would you guys believe Newt if he said “Hey, that was just my donor! I would never do that!”

I didn’t think so.”

Doomberg on January 25, 2012 at 5:57 PM

obama brings a Howitzer, Newt…will be late

runner on January 25, 2012 at 5:58 PM

Toomey’s the former PRESIDENT of CFG. Some liberal there!!

rockmom on January 25, 2012 at 5:33 PM

That was my point. I was responding to an imbecilic claim that Club For Growth was the Republican equivalent of kryptonite because CFG-supported Republicans “never win”. I was throwing the guy a bone by giving 2 quick examples that blow his assertion out of the water. But my main objective was to point out his intellectual laziness in making an erroneous claim and then demanding others prove his claim “wrong” (no doubt appointing himself the judge in determining sufficiency of proof in the process) when it was really his obligation to offer support of his claim.

fitzfong on January 25, 2012 at 5:58 PM

No, I think both candidates need to realize that sauce for the goose, is sauce for the gander. As a matter of fact, as much as I despise Gov. Romney’s pandering to the middle
Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 5:55 PM

you despise him for panderign to the middle??? meaning exactly what? he campaigns for every vote and he has every right to, are you sayimg that some votes are better or more valuable than others?…and what your proposed strategy would be? I was pretty sure that you need the middle to win general elections…what should the tactics ne then, ‘let the middle come to you’, as opposed to ‘you go to the middle’???…

jimver on January 25, 2012 at 5:59 PM

That’s a nifty conspiracy theory you’ve got there. Now, tell me more about those aliens the government is keeping secret in Area 51. And then I’m still a little confused over the whole faked moon landing thing.

And I’m also curious about Illuminati. Maybe he’s one of those Illuminati guys…

cicerone on January 25, 2012 at 5:57 PM

Were you asleep for 2010? Do you not agree that the a good chunk of GOP doesn’t want to cut spending? Do you not see how easy it would be for them to make up excuses not to cut spending?

Doomberg on January 25, 2012 at 5:59 PM

Doomberg on January 25, 2012 at 5:57 PM

If you keep digging that hole you’re in then eventually you’ll pop out in China.

alchemist19 on January 25, 2012 at 6:00 PM

Isn’t that sort of the point of getting an education, learning a skill, advancing in a career, investing wisely, saving money…so you hopefully get to point where you can do pretty much what you want, including sitting around on your ass, and not have to worry about paying the bills?

I’d like to get there, the sooner the better.

Bishop on January 25, 2012 at 6:01 PM

Mittarded folks need to do their homework on the VAT tax issue (there is plenty of material out there):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsMIa6E_KUk

The Wall Street Journal article referenced in this clip followed Romney’s failure to rule out a VAT tax, when questioned directly on the subject. Since this was only a couple of weeks ago, Mittards might also check the Hotair archives, if they are capable of doing their own research.

Typhonian on January 25, 2012 at 6:01 PM

If you keep digging that hole you’re in then eventually you’ll pop out in China.

alchemist19 on January 25, 2012 at 6:00 PM

Doesn’t all your spinning make you dizzy?

Doomberg on January 25, 2012 at 6:01 PM

There is no honor in being poor, none.

Bishop on January 25, 2012 at 5:01 PM

No, there is not. And I am sick of hearing people’s sob stories of poverty as a pretense for taking more of my money. My grandparents came to this country penniless. They worked their asses off in shi**y jobs for decades. They saved their money. They lived frugally. They raised decent, productive children. Now, a couple of generations later, my family is not penniless anymore. Poor people are like fat people, always looking for the magic bullet. You don’t want to be fat? Quit eating. You don’t want to be poor? Get a job live cheaply, save your money.

Bambi on January 25, 2012 at 5:08 PM

Those letters hit the nail on the head! And the people on here defending Newt Gingrich’s class warfare are, I believe, just too far gone. They are Obama voters, and they don’t even know it yet. Maybe not this election, but by in the next one or the one after that, they’ll be voting for the guy who promises to steal the most from their neighbors and give it to them. Envy sells, and it sells very well. But no one who calls himself a “conservative” would sit comfortably with referring to someone who has worked, saved, and invested as “making $20 million for no work.” That kind of Marxist rhetoric should be a deal breaker for Newt Gingrich with every single conservative in America.

Rational Thought on January 25, 2012 at 6:02 PM

Newt’s “political work” makes him a “working man”, just like a prostitute’s work makes her a “working girl”.

JohnGalt23 on January 25, 2012 at 5:37 PM

Read that, did some work. Still laughing. Hillariously accurate

bluealice on January 25, 2012 at 6:02 PM

Cindy- YOU CANNOT WIN without the middle. The math is not there. What do you not get about this??

FlaMurph on January 25, 2012 at 5:57 PM

The “Middle”. Try defining that moving target.

fitzfong on January 25, 2012 at 6:02 PM

Sorry you are incapable of recognizing sarcasm.

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 5:23 PM

Chill out, no need for snide personal remarks. Stick to the issues.

Exactly which part of your post was sarcasm? Are you okay with Romney investing in FM? You don’t really equate it with Newt’s lobbying job? Because considering your comments till now, you seem to equate both things. Strange that suddenly it was all sarcasm. Good news though, we need more people fighting defending what Romney does as an essential thing in any free-society and instrumental for wealth creation.

joana on January 25, 2012 at 6:02 PM

jimver on January 25, 2012 at 5:59 PM

Nice editing. I’m entitled to my opinion just as you are. If you think this strategy is so great than why wasn’t there a Pres. Dole and a Pres. McCain?

As a matter of fact, as much as I despise Gov. Romney’s pandering to the middle, I think Newt is doing the same thing by promoting class warfare. For me the only things Newt has going for him is at least a history of conservatism and the guts to take on Obama. And it’s not much of an advantage, but it is one.

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 5:55 PM

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 6:03 PM

Doesn’t all your spinning make you dizzy?

Doomberg on January 25, 2012 at 6:01 PM

I’m not spinning, I’m eagerly awaiting your links to credible news stories where Romney is advocating a federal VAT. I’ve already crossed Newt off my list of candidates so if you really can prove that and weren’t just making stuff up then I could all but cross Mitt off, too. So, please, show me what you’ve got.

alchemist19 on January 25, 2012 at 6:03 PM

The Wall Street Journal article referenced in this clip followed Romney’s failure to rule out a VAT tax, when questioned directly on the subject. Since this was only a couple of weeks ago, Mittards might also check the Hotair archives, if they are capable of doing their own research.

Typhonian on January 25, 2012 at 6:01 PM

Nonsense, I have just been assured by the Romney supporters that Mitt is a True Conservative who would never even consider a VAT tax, and that to think otherwise is a “conspiracy theory.”

Doomberg on January 25, 2012 at 6:03 PM

Those letters hit the nail on the head! And the people on here defending Newt Gingrich’s class warfare are, I believe, just too far gone. They are Obama voters, and they don’t even know it yet. Maybe not this election, but by in the next one or the one after that, they’ll be voting for the guy who promises to steal the most from their neighbors and give it to them. Envy sells, and it sells very well. But no one who calls himself a “conservative” would sit comfortably with referring to someone who has worked, saved, and invested as “making $20 million for no work.” That kind of Marxist rhetoric should be a deal breaker for Newt Gingrich with every single conservative in America.

Rational Thought on January 25, 2012 at 6:02 PM

Very well said.

joana on January 25, 2012 at 6:04 PM

FlaMurph on January 25, 2012 at 5:57 PM

I believe the country to be center right, not center left. I disagree with both candidates strategies.

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 6:05 PM

The “Middle”. Try defining that moving target.

fitzfong on January 25, 2012 at 6:02 PM

.
First you stop thinking of it as a target, and more like a voting block necessary to WIN elections.

FlaMurph on January 25, 2012 at 6:05 PM

The best I can hope for is that Newt stays in it long enough to scare Gov. Romney right.

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 5:10 PM

Are you listening to yourself? How does Gingrich bashing Romney from the left, scare Romney to the right?

You and Angry Ed need to take a few days off together. Perhaps a day spa?

csdeven on January 25, 2012 at 6:06 PM

I’m not spinning, I’m eagerly awaiting your links to credible news stories where Romney is advocating a federal VAT. I’ve already crossed Newt off my list of candidates so if you really can prove that and weren’t just making stuff up then I could all but cross Mitt off, too. So, please, show me what you’ve got.

alchemist19 on January 25, 2012 at 6:03 PM

You don’t consider a Romney advisor a credible source? Or do you not consider Hot Air a credible source?

http://www.redstate.com/erick/2012/01/25/romney-advisor-no-obamacare-repeal/

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/01/25/romney-advisor-come-on-obamacare-wont-ever-be-repealed-in-its-entirety/

And no, I don’t believe Romney’s denials that Coleman was just talking out of his rear, any more than Romney supporters believe that Gingrich did no lobbying work for Freddie. He himself has never DECLARED he’d done lobbying work, after all. It’s not even in his contract.

Doomberg on January 25, 2012 at 6:07 PM

First you stop thinking of it as a target, and more like a voting block necessary to WIN elections.

FlaMurph on January 25, 2012 at 6:05 PM

And what does this “necessary voting block” stand for? Submission on what policy issue(s) is the price of this block’s (temporary) support?

fitzfong on January 25, 2012 at 6:10 PM

The best I can hope for is that Newt stays in it long enough to scare Gov. Romney right.

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 5:10 PM

If Newt can push Romney right with his anti-capitalist rhetoric, Obama will make him Reagan on steroids.

joana on January 25, 2012 at 6:14 PM

I would love to know the definition of what some of you are calling Independent and moderate voters. Please……I don’t think you know what they are,let alone how to reach them……

noneoftheabove on January 25, 2012 at 6:15 PM

Did my caps lock get stuck on? For some reason some people are projecting their own emotions on my comments. That’s human nature but expecting me to adjust your interpretation isn’t possible or even slightly interesting to me.

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 6:16 PM

Nice editing. I’m entitled to my opinion just as you are. If you think this strategy is so great than why wasn’t there a Pres. Dole and a Pres. McCain?
Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 6:03 PM

there wasn’t any, editing…in McCain case, it is so beyond conception that it was actually the meltdown happening on the watch of a sitting Rep president, or could be the erratic response of his campaign and his inchoate, humpty-dumpty, all-over the place, if not downright bizarre reaction (‘I am calling off the campaign and I am going to Washington now! :-), or the fact that a 70 something year old man with not too much in terms of charisma about him was up against a 45 year old one with everything (from looks to charisma to identity politics) working for him like a charm …
Bob Dole, no idea, I was a child then, don’t even think I know how he looks like, I suppose I can google him, but I won’t…

jimver on January 25, 2012 at 6:17 PM

Vyce is correct. Based on Newt’s logic, let’s tell all of our parents and FL seniors that they don’t deserve their dividend checks and other income from CDs and other investments – because they obviously are doing “no work” in the Gospel of Newt Alinsky.

Hand these lazy, no good seniors a shovel, and send them to labor camps if they cannot see over the McDonald’s counter.

Focus group this attack and then get it on the Florida airwaves. Could be devastating.

matthew8787 on January 25, 2012 at 6:18 PM

You don’t consider a Romney advisor a credible source? Or do you not consider Hot Air a credible source?

http://www.redstate.com/erick/2012/01/25/romney-advisor-no-obamacare-repeal/

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/01/25/romney-advisor-come-on-obamacare-wont-ever-be-repealed-in-its-entirety/

And no, I don’t believe Romney’s denials that Coleman was just talking out of his rear, any more than Romney supporters believe that Gingrich did no lobbying work for Freddie. He himself has never DECLARED he’d done lobbying work, after all. It’s not even in his contract.

Doomberg on January 25, 2012 at 6:07 PM

Since you stubbornly refuse to provide links and instead tried to change the topic to Mitt stealing Newt’s idea for health care reform, I went out and dug it out myself.

The closest thing I can see to Romney and a VAT was a Wall Street Journal interview where Mitt says he doesn’t like the VAT on top of the current tax structure but wouldn’t rule out (not that he wants to, just that he wouldn’t close the door on) adding a VAT as a replacement for a part of the current tax code or lower personal income tax rates. That’s not too far from the Fair Tax or 9-9-9, depending on the specifics of how it ended up being implemented. And Mitt didn’t say that he was for it, just that it wouldn’t be a non-starter if it was proposed as part of a larger reform.

Since that’s incredibly weak I’m assuming that wasn’t what you were talking about. What did I miss?

alchemist19 on January 25, 2012 at 6:21 PM

Is that the same Harvard law School that educated John Roberts and Antonin Scalia?

Good law school, it looks like. As opposed to that clown college in New Orleans, known as Too Late University.

JohnGalt23 on January 25, 2012 at 5:34 PM

ouch, that was harsh…
Too late University looool :-)…

jimver on January 25, 2012 at 6:24 PM

No, I think both candidates need to realize that sauce for the goose, is sauce for the gander. As a matter of fact, as much as I despise Gov. Romney’s pandering to the middle, I think Newt is doing the same thing by promoting class warfare. For me the only things Newt has going for him is at least a history of conservatism and the guts to take on Obama. And it’s not much of an advantage, but it is one.

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 5:55 PM

By promoting class warfare Gingrich isn’t pandering to the middle, but to the far right.

The right and left ideologies aren’t parallel lines, but a circle. I always thought that the point where the two extremes meet is Ron Paul, but now it seems to be Gingrich. Therefore the “true conservatives” here sound like Occupy Wall Street.

Gelsomina on January 25, 2012 at 6:25 PM

Cindy, just for starters per your inquiry:

1. Neither McCain nor Dole could string 3 coherent sentences together. Mitt, by contrast, is telegenic and articulate.

2. Both McCain and Dole were quintissential DC insiders. Romney, by contrast, like Reagan, can run AGAINST DC.

3. Neither Dole nor McCain could explain the free market and all of its manifestations. Both stunk at explaining everything except foreign policy. Mitt has a mastery of all public policy issues.

4. Neither Dole nor McCain ever served as a governor; neither had executive experience.

5. Neither Dole nor McCain could capture sufficient votes of moderates and independents. Mitt has proven his ability to get the votes of the middle of the electorate, which always decides elections..

matthew8787 on January 25, 2012 at 6:25 PM

jimver on January 25, 2012 at 6:17 PM

I will concede that every possible aspect of the times and the optics were against Sen. McCain. I still wish that Gov. Romney was interested in securing the base. I personally prefer tenacity than nice. I’m not asking you to change your mind. I find our options to be sadly lacking.

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 6:26 PM

matthew8787 on January 25, 2012 at 6:25 PM

While I will give you that Gov. Romney is capable of stringing sentence together, I don’t find him compelling. I am sure that is more my problem than his, so his nomination is secure.

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 6:28 PM

Gelsomina on January 25, 2012 at 6:25 PM

I told you I don’t like Newt’s strategy, I assume he thinks he’s taking it away from Obama.

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 6:29 PM

the real question is would Newt have a wife if he lost the 500K credit line?

hanzblinx on January 25, 2012 at 6:30 PM

Since that’s incredibly weak I’m assuming that wasn’t what you were talking about. What did I miss?

alchemist19 on January 25, 2012 at 6:21 PM

It apparently came from Ben Domenech’s Transom http://bendomenech.com/transom/, and was cited in Erickson’s Redstate post. This is specifically what I’m noting:

As Ben Domenech notes in his Transom, Mitt Romney’s advisors have now advised him to support “a $2 gas tax, a VAT, and open Taliban talks.” Add to that list not repealing Obamacare.

You can argue that Erickson isn’t trustworthy, or that Domenech could be lying, I guess. But would either of these men wreck their reps by making this stuff up?

Doomberg on January 25, 2012 at 6:30 PM

Wow…. speechless…..

One wonders how far things can go before introspection happens and people start to think “Maybe’s it’s not everyone else. Maybe I’m actually wrong about this.”

alchemist19 on January 25, 2012 at 5:34 PM

I have wondered that over and over as well.

V7_Sport on January 25, 2012 at 6:32 PM

I will concede that every possible aspect of the times and the optics were against Sen. McCain. I still wish that Gov. Romney was interested in securing the base. I personally prefer tenacity than nice. I’m not asking you to change your mind. I find our options to be sadly lacking.

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 6:26 PM

I find them lacking, too. But Gingrich is no more conservative than Romney — he is, in fact, less so. He is a Washington insider who believes in big government and massive entitlement spending. If we want to go for the bombast, fine. But let us at least admit it’s the bombastic rhetoric we like, and not some pipe dream of “true conservatism.” Mitt Romney is a moderate. Newt Gingrich is a moderate. The question before us is which moderate are 51% of voters most likely to pull the lever for.

Rational Thought on January 25, 2012 at 6:33 PM

You can argue that Erickson isn’t trustworthy, or that Domenech could be lying, I guess. But would either of these men wreck their reps by making this stuff up?

Doomberg on January 25, 2012 at 6:30 PM

Are you serious?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Domenech#Plagiarism

joana on January 25, 2012 at 6:36 PM

Are you serious?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Domenech#Plagiarism

joana on January 25, 2012 at 6:36 PM

… wow. Just wow. I didn’t realize Domenech had gone off the deep end.

Okay. I’ll retract my statements on VAT and the gas tax with apologies.

Doomberg on January 25, 2012 at 6:38 PM

What would you call to labeling capital gains that results of one’s investing and risking his own money to “making money sitting on his ass”? That’s pretty much communist ling and playing with resentment.

joana on January 25, 2012 at 5:32 PM

I missed Glenn’s show this week. Is that the new talking point hew’s spewing?

PS: Did you know gold can be a great investment? Call Glenn now at 1-800-SUCKER and he will tell you all about it.

angryed on January 25, 2012 at 5:33 PM

Ha ha, Glenn does spew an ongoing torrent of stupidity, it would be no surprise.

The truth is that Romney was risking very little of his own money, and had assurances from Bain that if the enterprise failed, his future and income was secure. Romney started out interested in venture capital investments, but then decided to focus on LBOs because venture capital was too risky for his temperament (and there’s nothing wrong with that decision). However, when Romney steered away from venture capital, he also left behind the opportunity to grow the economy and create new jobs. His claims of massive job creation stand on very weak evidence, given the common outcome of an LBO is ‘greater efficiency’ and improved ‘shareholder profits’ aka layoffs. Make no mistake of that.

bayam on January 25, 2012 at 6:40 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3